Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
That seems to be the overall consensus I'm hearing. Guess we'll revisit it sometime after 16.04. Thanks all! Bryan On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Colin Ian King wrote: > After a lot of thorough testing over the past several months, I still > deem btrfs as experimental quality. There are still issues that can't be > easily recovered from, so personally, I don't recommended it quite yet > for a default filesystem. > > Colin > -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
I haven't investigated more than reading Chris Mason's post in the thread: "On our end, many of these Btrfs warts are getting solved. The 3.19 merge window fixes some very hard to find corruption problems that we've been chasing down, and Josef Bacik has developed a slick power-fail testing target that makes it much easier to prevent similar bugs in the future. 3.19 will also fix rare corruptions with block group removal, making both balance and the new auto-blockgroup cleanup feature much more reliable. We've hit a few performance problems deploying Btrfs here at Facebook, and fixes for these are making it into upstream kernels. We've also now caught two storage cards returning either stale or corrupt data, and the Btrfs crcs saved us from replicating the bad copies out across the cluster." On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Robie Basak wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:47:32AM -0400, Bryan Quigley wrote: >> >Is it really ready yet? For example, CoreOS reported having issues and >> >switched away in December/January: >> >> >https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/coreos-dev/NDEOXchAbuU >> >> That's what the previous UDS sessions discussed. AFAICT from that >> list the btrfs devs have fixed the issues identified. > > The discussion dates from December 2014, which is after our most recent > UDS. It seems to suggest the issues still existed at the time. Are you > saying that the issues are fixed and they hadn't noticed or didn't > consider this relevant to their discussion, or that the issues have been > fixed upstream this year? > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
On 22/04/15 15:47, Bryan Quigley wrote: >>> So on Suse, btrfs is used for rootfs but not user storage (e.g. /home is >>> on xfs). I see that attractive, as /usr is mostly read-only and only updated >>> with controlled tools. > > So what would you propose for Ubuntu? Our default install doesn't > break things up like that. Perhaps just for Ubuntu core? > >> Is it really ready yet? For example, CoreOS reported having issues and >> switched away in December/January: > >> https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/coreos-dev/NDEOXchAbuU > > That's what the previous UDS sessions discussed. AFAICT from that > list the btrfs devs have fixed the issues identified. I just > recovered from a power off btrfs bug myself, so I'm very happy to hear > they have a better test setup to reproduce those issues. > > Thanks, > Bryan > After a lot of thorough testing over the past several months, I still deem btrfs as experimental quality. There are still issues that can't be easily recovered from, so personally, I don't recommended it quite yet for a default filesystem. Colin -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:47:32AM -0400, Bryan Quigley wrote: > >Is it really ready yet? For example, CoreOS reported having issues and > >switched away in December/January: > > >https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/coreos-dev/NDEOXchAbuU > > That's what the previous UDS sessions discussed. AFAICT from that > list the btrfs devs have fixed the issues identified. The discussion dates from December 2014, which is after our most recent UDS. It seems to suggest the issues still existed at the time. Are you saying that the issues are fixed and they hadn't noticed or didn't consider this relevant to their discussion, or that the issues have been fixed upstream this year? signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
>> So on Suse, btrfs is used for rootfs but not user storage (e.g. /home is >> on xfs). I see that attractive, as /usr is mostly read-only and only updated >> with controlled tools. So what would you propose for Ubuntu? Our default install doesn't break things up like that. Perhaps just for Ubuntu core? >Is it really ready yet? For example, CoreOS reported having issues and >switched away in December/January: >https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/coreos-dev/NDEOXchAbuU That's what the previous UDS sessions discussed. AFAICT from that list the btrfs devs have fixed the issues identified. I just recovered from a power off btrfs bug myself, so I'm very happy to hear they have a better test setup to reproduce those issues. Thanks, Bryan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
On 21 April 2015 at 22:23, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > > On 21 Apr 2015 2:07 pm, "Martinx - ジェームズ" > wrote: > > > > On 21 April 2015 at 16:36, Bryan Quigley > wrote: > >> > >> Hi there, > >> > >> I'm just wondering if there are any plans to revisit btrfs as the > default filesystem before the next LTS? > >> > > So on Suse, btrfs is used for rootfs but not user storage (e.g. /home is > on xfs). I see that attractive, as /usr is mostly read-only and only > updated with controlled tools. > > >> Some key drivers I see are: > >> - If we want our app/snappy story to converge with systemds [1] > >> - LXC is even awesomer on btrfs (fast copies) > >> > >> AFAICT the last time this was condired was in the 12.10/13.04 timeframe > [2]. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> Bryan > >> > >> > >> [1] > http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html > >> [2] > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-r-btrfs-requirements > > > > > > Hey guys! > > > > Let me ask something here... > > > > Does Canonical / Ubuntu have plans to kick apt/dpkg in favor of some > kind of "systemd install my-package"? > > > > That's not inline with systemd upstream. It only has support for offline > updates with reboot. (See needs update conditions etc.) > > However see snappy / click and system image updates. > > > About BTRFS, it still can not be used to host KVM QCow2 images, neither > "/var/lib/mysql" directories... Since it lacks support for DIRECT_IO. > > > > Setting the flag to disable copy on write is available however. > Cool! Thank you for your clarification! -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
On 21 Apr 2015 2:07 pm, "Martinx - ジェームズ" wrote: > > On 21 April 2015 at 16:36, Bryan Quigley wrote: >> >> Hi there, >> >> I'm just wondering if there are any plans to revisit btrfs as the default filesystem before the next LTS? >> So on Suse, btrfs is used for rootfs but not user storage (e.g. /home is on xfs). I see that attractive, as /usr is mostly read-only and only updated with controlled tools. >> Some key drivers I see are: >> - If we want our app/snappy story to converge with systemds [1] >> - LXC is even awesomer on btrfs (fast copies) >> >> AFAICT the last time this was condired was in the 12.10/13.04 timeframe [2]. >> >> Thanks! >> Bryan >> >> >> [1] http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html >> [2] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-r-btrfs-requirements > > > Hey guys! > > Let me ask something here... > > Does Canonical / Ubuntu have plans to kick apt/dpkg in favor of some kind of "systemd install my-package"? > That's not inline with systemd upstream. It only has support for offline updates with reboot. (See needs update conditions etc.) However see snappy / click and system image updates. > About BTRFS, it still can not be used to host KVM QCow2 images, neither "/var/lib/mysql" directories... Since it lacks support for DIRECT_IO. > Setting the flag to disable copy on write is available however. > Cheers! > Thiago > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
On 21 April 2015 at 16:36, Bryan Quigley wrote: > Hi there, > > I'm just wondering if there are any plans to revisit btrfs as the default > filesystem before the next LTS? > > Some key drivers I see are: > - If we want our app/snappy story to converge with systemds [1] > - LXC is even awesomer on btrfs (fast copies) > > AFAICT the last time this was condired was in the 12.10/13.04 timeframe > [2]. > > Thanks! > Bryan > > > [1] > http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html > [2] > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-r-btrfs-requirements > Hey guys! Let me ask something here... Does Canonical / Ubuntu have plans to kick apt/dpkg in favor of some kind of "systemd install my-package"? About BTRFS, it still can not be used to host KVM QCow2 images, neither "/var/lib/mysql" directories... Since it lacks support for DIRECT_IO. Cheers! Thiago -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 03:36:09PM -0400, Bryan Quigley wrote: > I'm just wondering if there are any plans to revisit btrfs as the default > filesystem before the next LTS? Is it really ready yet? For example, CoreOS reported having issues and switched away in December/January: https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/coreos-dev/NDEOXchAbuU signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
btrfs plans for 15.10/16.04?
Hi there, I'm just wondering if there are any plans to revisit btrfs as the default filesystem before the next LTS? Some key drivers I see are: - If we want our app/snappy story to converge with systemds [1] - LXC is even awesomer on btrfs (fast copies) AFAICT the last time this was condired was in the 12.10/13.04 timeframe [2]. Thanks! Bryan [1] http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html [2] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-r-btrfs-requirements -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
